1978 Bristol 40 vs 1983 Pearson 31 — Comparison

1978 Bristol 401978 Bristol 40
VS
1983 Pearson 311983 Pearson 31

Specifications Side by Side

Specification1978 Bristol 401983 Pearson 31
General
ManufacturerBristolPearson
Year1978–19831983–1990
TypeSloopSloop
CountryUSAUSA
DesignerTed HoodWilliam Shaw
Dimensions
LOA12.19 m (40.0 ft)9.45 m (31.0 ft)
LWL9.14 m (30.0 ft)7.77 m (25.5 ft)
Beam3.35 m (11.0 ft)3.10 m (10.2 ft)
Draft1.68 m (5.5 ft)1.52 m (5.0 ft)
Weight
Displacement8,165 kg (18,001 lbs)4,309 kg (9,500 lbs)
Ballast3,402 kg (7,500 lbs)1,814 kg (3,999 lbs)
Sailing
Sail Area62.4 m² (672 ft²)40.0 m² (431 ft²)
Hull MaterialFiberglassFiberglass
Keel TypeFinFin
Engine & Tanks
Engine35 HP18 HP
Fuel Capacity114 L (30.1 gal)68 L (18.0 gal)
Water Capacity189 L (49.9 gal)114 L (30.1 gal)
Accommodation
Berths76
Cabins22

Performance Comparison

SA/D Ratio (Higher = more sail power per displacement)
1978 Bristol 40
15.63
1983 Pearson 31
15.35
Ballast Ratio (Higher = more stability)
1978 Bristol 40
41.67
1983 Pearson 31
42.10
Capsize Ratio (Lower = safer offshore)
1978 Bristol 40
0.67
1983 Pearson 31
0.76
Comfort Ratio (Higher = gentler motion)
1978 Bristol 40
24.80
1983 Pearson 31
21.43

Detailed Comparison

The 1978 Bristol 40 and 1983 Pearson 31 represent two takes on sloop-rigged sailing. The 1978 Bristol 40 is a 1970s design by Bristol from USA, while the 1983 Pearson 31 is a 1980s offering from Pearson from USA. The 1978 Bristol 40 was penned by Ted Hood. The 1983 Pearson 31 was designed by William Shaw.

In terms of size, the 1978 Bristol 40 measures 12.19m (40.0ft) overall with a beam of 3.35m, compared to the 1983 Pearson 31 at 9.45m (31.0ft) with a 3.10m beam. The 1978 Bristol 40 is 2.74m longer than the 1983 Pearson 31. The 1978 Bristol 40 displaces approximately 89% more than its counterpart, which significantly affects how each boat handles in different sea states.

Looking at performance, the 1978 Bristol 40 has moderate sail power suitable for relaxed cruising with an SA/D ratio of 15.63 and 62.4 m² of sail area. The 1983 Pearson 31, with an SA/D of 15.35 and 40.0 m² of canvas, offers moderate sail power suitable for relaxed cruising. The 1978 Bristol 40 has the edge in terms of raw sailing performance.

For comfort and safety, the 1978 Bristol 40 offers a moderate motion comfort level (comfort ratio: 24.8) and excellent capsize resistance suitable for offshore voyaging (capsize ratio: 0.67). The 1983 Pearson 31 has a comfort ratio of 21.4 and a capsize screening value of 0.76. The ballast ratios are 41.7% for the 1978 Bristol 40 and 42.1% for the 1983 Pearson 31, reflecting their respective approaches to stability.

Below deck, the 1978 Bristol 40 provides 7 berths in 2 cabins with 189L of water capacity and 114L of fuel. The 1983 Pearson 31 offers 6 berths in 2 cabins with 114L water and 68L fuel capacity.

Verdict

For cruising: The 1978 Bristol 40 is the better choice for comfortable cruising thanks to its higher comfort ratio, offering a gentler motion at sea that crews will appreciate on longer passages.

For racing: The 1978 Bristol 40 has the performance advantage with its superior SA/D ratio, meaning more sail power relative to its displacement for competitive sailing.

For liveaboard: The 1978 Bristol 40 offers more sleeping accommodation, making it better suited for extended living aboard. Consider water and fuel capacity for extended stays away from marinas.

Compare Different Boats

Looking for a different matchup? Browse All Boats

Or view individual specs: 1978 Bristol 40 · 1983 Pearson 31